ABC:Reid-after a series of mtgs with Dem moderates–has concluded he can pass a bill with a PO"

[Pirate Smile]

Public Option: It's Back

October 22, 2009 3:17 PM

ABC News' Jonathan Karl reports:

The public option. The idea was believed to be dead. Liberals wanted it, but Senate vote counters insisted it simply could not pass the Senate. The dynamic, however, has changed. The public option may be back from dead.

am told that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is leaning toward including the creation of a new government-run insurance program – the so-called public option – in the health care reform bill he will bring to the full Senate in the coming weeks.

Democratic sources tell me that Reid – after a series of meetings with Democratic moderates – has concluded he can pass a bill with a public option.

This is not because there has been a new groundswell of support for the idea. In fact, there are still a handful of Democrats who -- along with Olympia Snowe and every other Republican – oppose the idea. As recently as this morning, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA), for one, dismissed recent polls that show public support for the idea, telling NPR, "I think if you asked, do you want a public option but it would force the government to go bankrupt, people would say no.”

That would appear to be a problem because Reid needs 60 votes to pass a health care bill and there are simply not 60 Senators who support a public option. But Reid is now convinced that Democratic critics of the public option will support him when it counts – on the procedural motion, which requires 60 votes, to defeat a certain GOP-led filibuster of the bill. Once the filibuster is beaten, it only takes 51 votes to pass the bill.

And Democratic critics of the public option would get a chance to go on-the-record with their opposition by voting for an amendment to strip it from the health care bill. Under Senate rules, such an amendment would need 60 votes to pass. And while there may not be 60 votes in favor of a public option, there are also not 60 votes against it. So, it would remain in the bill.

The downside: The move would almost certainly cost Democrats the support of Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), the sole Republican who now supports Democratic health care reform efforts. Asked today if she would vote to block a bill with public option, Snowe told reporters, “On the public option? I'd say I'm against a public option, so yes."

Another important point: Reid’s version of the public option is different from the more liberal version advocated by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in two key ways: 1) Reid’s version would allow individual states to opt-out of the program, giving public option critics the chance to say that their states retain the right to scrap the idea; and, 2) Under Reid’s plan, the new government insurance program would have to negotiate payment rates with health care providers. Under Pelosi’s, payment rates would be tied to the lower rates paid by Medicare.

This is not a done deal. I am told that Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) – who worked for months to get Olympia Snowe’s support for the bill and has consistently said a public option cannot pass the Senate – was apoplectic when Reid told him he wanted to include the public option. “Baucus went to DEFCON 1,” said a source familiar with the negotiations, referring to the alert level the military uses for an imminent attack on the homeland.


October 22, 2009 in Health Care

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/10/public-option-its-back.html#

Sounds good. I never thought the PO was dead.

Conference between House and Senate would be a negotiation between these two: 1) strong PO tied to +5 Medicare rates, and 2) PO with Opt Out with rates negotiated.

[SpartanDem]

1. It was never dead jackasses

[rudy23]

3. I guess if they pretend it was once dead, we're supposed to be happier with an opt-out plan

Or an exchange, or what have you. It's still good news, but partly because Dems did such an effective job of lowering our expectations.

[Oregone]

6. I can't help but have shared this sentiment often

Superb political stagecraft going on here.

Im hungry. Please feed me my shit sandwich

[Parker CA]

4. + a lot of +'s

[Vincardog]

2. Fuck Baucus. Fuck mandates. Fuck Olympia Snowe Fuck triggers

[brooklynite]

14. Please show me.....

.....either 60 Senate votes for Cloture -or- 51 Senators who believe this can be done through Reconciliation. So far, I haven't seen evidence for either.

[Vincardog]

18. Do I look like the Democratic whip?

[Oregone]

5. All this blathering is just blather until we know: what *kind* of a public option

[depakid]

9. It certainly is

We're not talking about "a rose by any other name..." and the DINO's have a long history of selling ordinary Americans down the river. Indeed, they've been quite persistent in their efforts.

[damntexdem]

11. Yes, it needs to be available to everyone.

And the closer it is to Medicare principles, the faster it can be implemented.

[joeycola]

13. but Reids has the opt out feature and differs on Medicare payments also.

[backscatter712]

15. Probably the opt-out version.

It's annoying, but the only compromise that isn't a "compromise" - it doesn't totally give away the store.

So if we get opt-out in the Senate, and the House passes the Medicare + 5% public option, we're likely to end up relatively well.

Personally, I'm happy to get a public option, even if it's a weak-assed opt-out version. That just means we can strengthen it incrementally later.

Which is why the insurance companies and their Congressional sockpuppets hate it.

[stevenleser]

20. Exactly. Surprising how few people get this.

Whatever is enacted will look different 10 years from now. We need to get some kind of public option in there. Besides needing to do this to get the uninsured access and to wipe out unfair insurance company provisions like pre-existing conditions, getting this done will be a huge boost to Democratic candidates in 2010 and we can make any needed modifications after that.

[Mass]

22. Opt out is fine given two provisions: that states cannot opt out before they try and that people

dont have to wait 4 years before a PO is put in place.

[optimator]

7. "Democratic critics of the public option"

never seen or heard of any critics of a p.o. except from politicians

[liskddksil]

8. Poor max baucus just got pwned

[stevenleser]

21. But you know what, re: Baucus, I am very thankful to him for one thing...

the passing of the most conservative of health care reform bills was incredibly useful for demonstrating that no matter how much of a reach out was done to the Republicans, they are not interested in health care reform.

I have used this over and over again in examples.

[Beetwasher]

10. Hee Hee

So BOTH bills will go into conference WITH public options.

[joeycola]

12. Oh Reid, get some spine please!!

[BootinUp]

16. Be careful Max, it might become even more obvious

to your constituency, what a whore you are.

[Hutzpa]

17. What kind of bill Mr Reid?

:shrug:

[jeanpalmer]

19. This is great news for a PO

Looks like it's a done deal. The Senate is willing vote for a PO with the opt out and negotiated rates, and the House will vote, at a minimum, for the same thing (probably using Medicare rates). Then it will be up to President Obama to sign it. The only thing that could derail it would be the WH.

I don't see the difference between a PO and a PO with an opt out. Once a state uses the PO, and people get used to it, no one will opt out of it if it really provides value.

Interesting comment by Landrieu, "it would force the government to go bankrupt." Wonder why she believes that?